Facebook   Twitter    e-mail newsletter    YouTube    RSS Feed    Android App    iPhone and iPad App     BlackBerry App    

  • Obama has slight edge against Romney




    With 100 days to go before the US election, President Barack Obama appears to have a slight edge over Republican rival Mitt Romney, though he is still at the mercy of a stumbling US economy.

    Polls show the Democratic incumbent's lead is shrinking as voters lose faith in his ability to tackle crucial domestic issues, in particular the economy, as growth slows and the job market stubbornly refuses to pick up.

    According to a Wall Street Journal and NBC poll published this week, only 36 percent of American voters are confident Obama can improve the economy, while 43 percent prefer Romney, a multi-millionaire former venture capitalist.

    Obama and his team have been hammering away at Romney's argument that his business experience makes him the better choice to get Americans back to work, alleging that his firm often sacked US workers and sent jobs abroad.

    But the attacks appear to have gained little traction with a pessimistic electorate. Unemployment is stuck at 8.2 percent and is not expected to fall below 7.9 percent by the end of the year, the White House acknowledged Friday.

    Figures released by the US Commerce Department on Friday showed GDP growth in the second quarter slowing to 1.5 percent from 2.0 percent in the first, amid falling consumer demand.

    Economists warn that growth of less than two percent is not enough to make inroads into unemployment, and Romney's economic advisers claim that their policies could quickly double the rate.

    Sixty percent of Americans believe the country is on the wrong track, the poll found.

    An average of national polls compiled by RealClearPolitics.com, a non-partisan website that tracks political trends, shows Obama slightly ahead of Romney overall, with 46.4 percent of the vote to 45.1 percent.

    His lead has narrowed from 3.6 percent at the beginning of July, even though polling expert Nate Silver of The New York Times, gives Obama a 65 percent chance of being re-elected thanks to the lead he enjoys in certain key states.

    In his speeches, Obama exhorts his followers to mobilize for what he warns will be a tight election. In fact, the WSJ and NBC poll found that only eight percent of the electorate remains undecided at this point.

    The campaign is likely to gather in intensity in August, and several key events in the coming weeks could still shift the momentum.

    Romney must unveil his running mate, Republicans and Democrats will hold nominating conventions at the end of August and early September respectively and televised debates have been scheduled for October 3, 16 and 22.

    "What matters most is economic news over the next 100 days," said Thomas Mann, an expert on the US presidency at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank.

    "Every democratic government around the world faces a daunting challenge getting re-elected during these difficult economic times," he told AFP.

    But Mann said he was "impressed by the fact that Obama has maintained a small lead over Romney and job approval ratings just a few points under 50 percent over the last months is spite of the economy."

    Still, Obama has recently suffered a drop in his personal popularity. Some 43 percent of voters responding to the WSJ and NBC poll said they had a negative opinion -- 32 percent of them "very negative" -- of their president.

    The decline comes amid an onslaught of aggressive Democratic campaign ads targeting Romney's Swiss bank accounts and what they portray as a record of lost jobs at companies controlled by Bain Capital, the investment company he led.

    The two camps have pummeled each other on issues as diverse as foreign policy and support for small business. Romney accuses Obama of espousing a view of the economy that is "foreign to the American experience."

    For its part, the White House has mounted a deft counter-program to Romney's current trip overseas, hailing the "special relationship" with Britain on Thursday just as Romney struggled with a gaffe over the Olympics in London.

    On Friday, Obama signed a law strengthening US cooperation with Israel in an Oval Office ceremony that happened to be held just ahead of Romney's visit to the Jewish state this weekend.

    On the campaign trail, Obama strategy has been to position himself as the defender of the middle class while lambasting his rival as an "outsourcing pioneer."

    He has campaigned heavily in states that could decide the outcome of the November 6 election, such as Ohio and Florida, to where he travels next week.
    Comments 101 Comments
    1. OrbitalDawn's Avatar
      OrbitalDawn -
      Quote Originally Posted by marine1 View Post
      I will just say one thing, his agenda against Israel and pro Arab makes me mad.
      That is probably the most annoying thing.

      I wont go into all the other things that he has done, probably the same or worse than Bush in terms of laws in the US.
      What the hell are you talking about? How is he anti-Israel? He attempted to get the Arab world not to hate the US. How is that a bad thing?
    1. marine1's Avatar
      marine1 -
      Are you guys joking?
      Go and google his policies
      http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...israel-agenda/
      http://www.theislandnow.com/opinions...871e3ce6c.html
      http://www.thejerusalemconnection.us...y-actions.html

      Really have not got the time or patience to go and look on the internet, google is your friend
    1. copacetic's Avatar
      copacetic -
      From one of your articles, marine1:

      The Biblical prophecies are consistent on the fate of those nations who act against Israel. Zechariah 12:9 quotes our Lord: “I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Israel.” That destruction will be based on actions rather than words. The president has chosen a very dangerous path for every American and one that promises great difficulty for Israel.
      Do I really need to point out that citing sources that are driven by belief in Biblical prophecy is not particularly compelling? In fact it verges on the absurd.

      ***

      I don't pay all that much attention to foreign policy stuff, but as far as I can tell, Obama is bombing the **** out of many Muslim nations, and it seems to the reason for this butt-hurt notion that he is anti-Israel is because he has not gone straight to war with Iran.

      Partisan madness - People like you are so blinded by your love of one side and your hatred of the other that you don't seem vaguely able to make rational decisions.

      And don't call me an Obama fanboy - I've made my feelings known about him, many times on the forum already, and I am no fan.
    1. killadoob's Avatar
      killadoob -
      LOL all those drones strikes against arab, yea very pro arab that is.

      War with iran, very pro arab as well.
    1. Garson007's Avatar
      Garson007 -
      Quote Originally Posted by zippy View Post
      I think Romney will be more entertaining. Imagine, a muppet(Romney), clown(Boris Johnson), toff(David Cameron). Something laugh about, which is about all the value politicians add to society.
      You forgot Merkel; destroyer Europe.
    1. copacetic's Avatar
      copacetic -
      When it comes to praising President Obama’s foreign policy skill and Toughness (in the neocon sense of that term: i.e., a willingness to risk other people’s lives with the use of military force against foreigners), The Atlantic‘s Jeffrey Goldberg has been one of the most reliable and vocal voices. Considered by Obama aides “as the ‘official therapist’ of the U.S.-Israel relationship,” Goldberg has been particularly important in vouching for Obama to Israelis and American Jews on the ground that nobody will be Tougher on Iran than Obama (in return for this service, Goldberg — like all helpful journalists are — has been rewarded by the White House with substantial career-boosting access). In his Bloomberg column this morning, Goldberg argues that Israeli officials should pray for Obama’s victory in the November election, and makes this argument in support:

      On the matter of Iran, however, Netanyahu would be wrong to root for Romney. Barack Obama is the one who’s more likely to confront Iran militarily, should sanctions and negotiations fail. He has committed himself to stopping Iran by any means necessary, and he has a three-year record as president to back his rhetoric. Romney has only rhetoric, and he would be hamstrung in many ways if he chose military confrontation.

      He goes on to argue that despite the GOP challenger’s Tough rhetoric, “Romney would face several critical challenges in a conflict with Iran that Obama would not”; specifically:

      Romney, by all accounts, is uninterested in inheriting the mantle of President George W. Bush, who invaded two Muslim countries and lost popularity and credibility as a result. Romney, despite his rhetoric, is more of a pragmatist than Bush, and far more cautious. An attack on Iran is an incautious act, one that even Bush rejected.

      The unilateral use of force in the Middle East for a liberal Democrat like Obama is a credential; for a conservative Republican like Romney, it could be an albatross. I argued in a previous column that Romney is more likely than Obama to oversee a revitalized Middle East peace process. That’s because conservatives are better positioned to make peace; liberals are generally better positioned to launch preventive strikes at the nuclear programs of rogue nations. We know that U.S. voters, and world leaders, allow Obama extraordinary leeway when it comes to deadly drone strikes, precisely because of his politics, character and background. (We are talking about a man, after all, who won the Nobel Peace Prize while ordering the automated killing of suspected Muslim terrorists around the world.) Romney will get no comparative slack.

      In other words, Obama will be freer to attack Iran than Romney would be because Democrats, progressives, and the “international community” (that’s neocon for: Europeans) passively accept or even cheer for violence, aggression and executive power abuses when ordered by a sophisticated, urbane, Constitutional Law Professor with Good Progressivism in his heart, and only cause a messy ruckus when done by an icky, religious, overtly nationalistic Republican.
      http://www.salon.com/2012/07/27/most...o_attack_iran/

      *edit*

      Marine1, read this article, it makes a pretty good point, I think.
    1. marine1's Avatar
      marine1 -
      Quote Originally Posted by copacetic View Post
      Do I really need to point out that citing sources that are driven by belief in Biblical prophecy is not particularly compelling? In fact it verges on the absurd.
      Fine if you are not a believer, billions are.
    1. JamSync's Avatar
      JamSync -
      Quote Originally Posted by zippy View Post
      Yeah, he is good at getting American business moving. Offshore. Lol. Obviously non-Americans are gonna love him, and Americans with shares in offshore companies. You have to be a bit retarded to vote for someone who is gonna move your job to China. But them most right-wing Americans are a bit inbred and thick.
      Is Obama's administration not doing the same thing?
    1. Garyvdh's Avatar
      Garyvdh -
      I would also prefer someone else other than Obama... BUT... I don't want Romney to get in... he's a nutcase. So I guess it will have to be Obama for a second term. The Democrats don't have much luck in the second term department though.
    1. copacetic's Avatar
      copacetic -
      Quote Originally Posted by copacetic View Post
      Marine1, read this article, it makes a pretty good point, I think.
      If you do, please comment. I'd be interested to hear what you have to say.
    1. R13...'s Avatar
      R13... -
      Quote Originally Posted by copacetic View Post
      If you do, please comment. I'd be interested to hear what you have to say.
      Lol. You expect him to actually be objective? You're too hopeful copa, too hopeful. Marine1 holds beliefs, he's not one to be objective.
    1. Garyvdh's Avatar
      Garyvdh -
      Quote Originally Posted by R13... View Post
      Lol. You expect him to actually be objective? You're too hopeful copa, too hopeful. Marine1 holds beliefs, he's not one to be objective.
      lol, you are one to talk! Objective? I don't think you know what that word means!
    1. chrisc4290's Avatar
      chrisc4290 -
      Romney is totally divorced from reality. With his billions, he has no inkling of how ordinary people live. He seemed taken aback that someone not of robust means would want a helping hand from the govt.
    1. R13...'s Avatar
      R13... -
      Quote Originally Posted by Garyvdh View Post
      lol, you are one to talk! Objective? I don't think you know what that word means!
      If I asked you to show how I behave like mindless (like you anytime the ANC, Apple/android/MC is mentioned or marine1 about anything from drugs to 'Arabs') you'd duck off about being too lazy to search,won't you Gary?
    1. marine1's Avatar
      marine1 -
      Quote Originally Posted by R13... View Post
      Lol. You expect him to actually be objective? You're too hopeful copa, too hopeful. Marine1 holds beliefs, he's not one to be objective.
      The most retarded thing I have heard.
      Everyone on this forum holds beliefs
    1. biometrics's Avatar
      biometrics -
      Quote Originally Posted by marine1 View Post
      Everyone on this forum holds beliefs
      True, I believe there a several nutters here.
    1. ghoti's Avatar
      ghoti -
      http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/...-electoral-map

      Obama decently ahead. He is going to walk this easily. Whats important is how much wins by.
    1. copacetic's Avatar
      copacetic -
      Quote Originally Posted by marine1 View Post
      The most retarded thing I have heard.
      Everyone on this forum holds beliefs
      It would be even better if you did read the article and comment...
    1. Bryn26's Avatar
      Bryn26 -
      Quote Originally Posted by marine1 View Post
      The most retarded thing I have heard.
      Everyone on this forum holds beliefs
      I don't believe in anything supernatural, not because I actively assert that such beliefs are not true but because I just don't find the evidence compelling enough. What beliefs do I have?
    1. marine1's Avatar
      marine1 -
      Quote Originally Posted by copacetic View Post
      It would be even better if you did read the article and comment...
      Can you maybe relax and hold onto your panties? I am on my BB